Inquiry into potential LC exam security breach

clunked

Somebody is in trouble. I'd be suprised if it is an experienced supervisor.
https://www.rte.ie/news/education/2017/0613/882439-leaving-cert/

CWF

clunked wrote: »

Somebody is in trouble. I'd be suprised if it is an experienced supervisor.
https://www.rte.ie/news/education/2017/0613/882439-leaving-cert/

Doesn't seem to be many of them this year!

r93kaey5p2izun

What a stupid thing to do. Perhaps they thought it would be ok since candidates could leave after 10 and no new candidates could enter after that time. Either way, incredibly foolish.

CWF

Erica Tangy Respirator wrote: »

What a stupid thing to do. Perhaps they thought it would be ok since candidates could leave after 10 and no new candidates could enter after that time. Either way, incredibly foolish.

After 30 you mean

r93kaey5p2izun

CWF wrote: »

After 30 you mean

I mean after 10am. Since the exam started at 9.30 and the photo was apparently uploaded after 10am.

TheDriver

It makes you realise that when a teacher is at the door wanting a peek at the exam and you're being genuine giving it out. So easy for something to make the news regarding the LC or JC

evolving_doors

TheDriver wrote: »

It makes you realise that when a teacher is at the door wanting a peek at the exam and you're being genuine giving it out. So easy for something to make the news regarding the LC or JC

Jeez couldn't they at least wait till after the exam.
Happened in a closed page on Facebook though. I wonder will they get a whipping boy out for public sacrifice.

mirrorwall14

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Jeez couldn't they at least wait till after the exam.
Happened in a closed page on Facebook though. I wonder will they get a whipping boy out for public sacrifice.

Just shows you they are monitoring online closeky

evolving_doors

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

Just shows you they are monitoring online closeky

I'd say someone from the page dobbed them in.

Bean Scoile

My guess is that it was someone who was doing reader and their candidate left at 10. I can't imagine how else it could have happened.

_Brian

Could anyone really have benifeted from it though ??

Bean Scoile

_Brian wrote: »

Could anyone really have benifeted from it though ??

Only teachers who were dying to find out what came up!

gctest50

"It said the exam would not have been compromised for students sitting it."

Until one of the students have one of these and someone on the outside with access to the closed facebook group :

tiny earpiece 101

rainbowtrout

Bean Scoile wrote: »

My guess is that it was someone who was doing reader and their candidate left at 10. I can't imagine how else it could have happened.

Or they were just brazen enough to bring a phone into the special centre with them, take photos and upload. Nothing would surprise me these days.

Bean Scoile

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Or they were just brazen enough to bring a phone into the special centre with them, take photos and upload. Nothing would surprise me these days.

Well that would be particularly naive, but wouldn't surprise me either.

I'm sure whoever reported them screenshot it so the sec will know exactly who it was.

Bananaleaf

I know they are saying this wasn't a superintendent who leaked the paper, but in my experience, new superintendents are not given enough training for the position and superintendents of separate centres are given none at all unless they are lucky enough to have a decent SNA coordinator, but still, nothing from the department at all. I would bet that the person who did this had no idea that they were doing anything wrong.

rainbowtrout

Bananaleaf wrote: »

I know they are saying this wasn't a superintendent who leaked the paper, but in my experience, new superintendents are not given enough training for the position and superintendents of separate centres are given none at all unless they are lucky enough to have a decent SNA coordinator, but still, nothing from the department at all. I would bet that the person who did this had no idea that they were doing anything wrong.

Presumably if they are a member of an Irish teachers group, and also in a school with access to an exam paper on the morning of the exam, they are a qualified Irish teacher. You'd have to be living under a rock to not be aware of the security surrounding the LC exams every year and anyone who is teaching will be old enough to remember the debacle with the English paper in 2009.

Any teacher with more than two brain cells should have enough cop not to post a paper online during an exam, whether they are a superintendent of an exam, a teacher who got the paper from a superintendent, or a teacher who was supervising in a special centre. In two of those cases they would have most likely been in the centre with their phone. I don't think lack of training is an excuse for being an utter tool.

Bananaleaf

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Presumably if they are a member of an Irish teachers group, and also in a school with access to an exam paper on the morning of the exam, they are a qualified Irish teacher. You'd have to be living under a rock to not be aware of the security surrounding the LC exams every year and anyone who is teaching will be old enough to remember the debacle with the English paper in 2009.

Any teacher with more than two brain cells should have enough cop not to post a paper online during an exam, whether they are a superintendent of an exam, a teacher who got the paper from a superintendent, or a teacher who was supervising in a special centre. In two of those cases they would have most likely been in the centre with their phone. I don't think lack of training is an excuse for being an utter tool.

They shouldn't post it up online, no. But my point is that anyone can act as superintendent in a separate centre, including a college student. Also, it was a resource share group for Irish teachers. Wouldn't say every member of a facebook group is asked for a copy of their transcripts. If it was Irish teachers association then maybe.

Also, you say that anyone with two brain cells should know not to post a paper online during an exam. I agree with you 100%. Yet this person did it. This same person was given custody of the papers by SEC. That shouldn't happen. It's a tough one for the SEC because they need to take those who apply as there aren't enough numbers for them to have a set of criteria to meet. They can't interview us all and reference letters from principals wouldn't be worth the paper they're written on, so I think the very least they could do is up the training. It might not be an excuse for being a tool, but what else can one expect if they don't train people sufficiently?

What is the 2009 debacle? Is this where the incorrect envelope of papers were opened and paper 2 had to be sat on a Saturday? If so, that is an entirely different situation and has nothing in common with what happened today.

rainbowtrout

Bananaleaf wrote: »

They shouldn't post it up online, no. But my point is that anyone can act as superintendent in a separate centre, including a college student. Also, it was a resource share group for Irish teachers. Wouldn't say every member of a facebook group is asked for a copy of their transcripts. If it was Irish teachers association then maybe.

Also, you say that anyone with two brain cells should know not to post a paper online during an exam. I agree with you 100%. Yet this person did it. This same person was given custody of the papers by SEC. That shouldn't happen. It's a tough one for the SEC because they need to take those who apply as there aren't enough numbers for them to have a set of criteria to meet. They can't interview us all and reference letters from principals wouldn't be worth the paper they're written on, so I think the very least they could do is up the training. It might not be an excuse for being a tool, but what else can one expect if they don't train people sufficiently?

What is the 2009 debacle? Is this where the incorrect envelope of papers were opened and paper 2 had to be sat on a Saturday? If so, that is an entirely different situation and has nothing in common with what happened today.

While it was a different scenario, the SEC discovered the error because the information about Paper 2 was posted on twitter by a student. The point I'm making is posting information about an exam in progress (or given out in error) is a big no-no.

From what was reported, it was a resource group with 3000 members. Quite a large 'private' group. All of those teachers would have had access to the paper after the exam was finished, and the exams are put up online by the SEC at 7pm every evening.


The vast majority of people working in special centres in my experience are already working in some capacity within the education system. I'm not sure how much training a person needs in this country to have to be told 'do not take photos of an exam and post them online while the exam is in progress'. There comes a point where an adult has to take personal responsibility for their actions rather than blaming everyone else. The LC gets massive coverage every year for almost the entire month of June in our national media, it's impossible not to know it's going on and the importance attached to it.

Red F Warrior

_Brian wrote:

Could anyone really have benifeted from it though ??

No. Latecomers are only allowed in no more than 20 minutes after the exam has started and anyone leaving is only allowed to, 30 minutes after the exam has started.

As this was released 30 minutes after the exam has started all students would have been in their centres and any that weren't would not have been allowed in.

spurious

All you need is another Superintendent not sticking to the rules by (say) letting someone in after the thirty minute deadline and you have a right mess. The rules are there for a reason.

Chancer3001

It literally matters 0%.

It wasn't leaked in enough time for a single person to benefit from it.

Spiro66

The point is that nobody on the outside should have a copy of the exam during the duration of the exam to prevent the possibility of secret communication via a hidden electronic device. Someone on the outside could be sending answers in to an earpiece or iwatch for example. All seems unlikely but you never know.

aon1998

Are exam supervisors allowed to be on their phones during the exam? Mine was sitting down the back on his phone and took a fair bit of attention and time to get more paper off him.

spurious

aon1998 wrote: »

Are exam supervisors allowed to be on their phones during the exam? Mine was sitting down the back on his phone and took a fair bit of attention and time to get more paper off him.

No they shouldn't be.
If he was in my school I wouldn't be long reporting him. Plenty other people who will do the job properly.

I realise it is a very boring job, having done it in the past, but people know that when they are signing up for it. You having to wait for paper is disgraceful.

aon1998

Would it be worth reporting it? I don't want to get him in serious trouble or anything.

mtoutlemonde

aon1998 wrote: »

Would it be worth reporting it? I don't want to get him in serious trouble or anything.

Well if you report it, he will be serious trouble. I would just let it go. You weren't half your exam waiting for paper or anything. And at the end of the day, the guidelines state that candidates should have enough paper on the exam paper and extra paper should only be issued IF the candidate has ran out of paper. You should try sitting for up to three hours with nothing to do, it's only natural that the superintendent would have had a small look at his phone but not for long periods. I know he was not meant to but put yourself in his shoes. I'm not in the least condoning it though.

rainbowtrout

mtoutlemonde wrote: »

Well if you report it, he will be serious trouble. I would just let it go. You weren't half your exam waiting for paper or anything. And at the end of the day, the guidelines state that candidates should have enough paper on the exam paper and extra paper should only be issued IF the candidate has ran out of paper. You should try sitting for up to three hours with nothing to do, it's only natural that the superintendent would have had a small look at his phone but not for long periods. I know he was not meant to but put yourself in his shoes. I'm not in the least condoning it though.

How do you know it was only a small look. A candidate is entitled to ask for extra paper and some papers are Cert tight for time. Leaving them sitting there because the supervisor can't be arsed doing their job is not good enough.

We don't have to put ourselves in his shoes. He shouldn't be on his phone. If he's not supervising students, it allows an opportunity for cheating to occur. It delays students getting paper. It's a very simple job and anyone who is not able to stay off their phone for three hours while they supervise an exam is an idiot

aon1998

He went down the back at the start of the exam and anytime I looked back he was on the phone. You're literally writing until the last second in the business exam so I was kinda annoyed at him. If he didn't want to sit there for three hours then he should not of signed up for the position.

mtoutlemonde

aon1998 wrote: »

He went down the back at the start of the exam and anytime I looked back he was on the phone. You're literally writing until the last second in the business exam so I was kinda annoyed at him. If he didn't want to sit there for three hours then he should not of signed up for the position.

He shouldn't have been at the back of the room because that wasted time if a student wanted something as he had to go to student, back to table for whatever and back to student.

mtoutlemonde

rainbowtrout wrote: »

How do you know it was only a small look. A candidate is entitled to ask for extra paper and some papers are Cert tight for time. Leaving them sitting there because the supervisor can't be arsed doing their job is not good enough.

We don't have to put ourselves in his shoes. He shouldn't be on his phone. If he's not supervising students, it allows an opportunity for cheating to occur. It delays students getting paper. It's a very simple job and anyone who is not able to stay off their phone for three hours while they supervise an exam is an idiot

Well it was obviously more than a small look according to the annoyed poster which isn't on.

TheDriver

Chancer3001 wrote: »

It literally matters 0%.

It wasn't leaked in enough time for a single person to benefit from it.

How do we know? The only fact is that it was posted 30 mins after exam started but someone could have got the paper at 9:30. Either way, the rules were broken. And when it comes to SEC exams, those rules are definitely not made for breaking and anyone who does is a complete idiot

TheDriver

If a superintendent is doing anything out of the way e.g. on the phone, then you (or your parents) ring the principal or exam aide to report. They in turn will make a report to the SEC. Its a job that requires someone to keep the high standard that is expected in the operation of the exams. No discretion should be had by fellow teachers or school management when it comes to this.
In my experience, the SEC always want to hear about anything that could be perceived as undermining the process, no matter how small.

aon1998

I think I will report it, I've a few more heavy writing exams so I don't want to sit waiting around again.

r93kaey5p2izun

Report the superintendent. There's no excuse for looking at his phone. Boredom is irrelevant and absolutely not a valid excuse.

Crazyteacher

aon1998 wrote: »

I think I will report it, I've a few more heavy writing exams so I don't want to sit waiting around again.

I would get a parent to mention it to your principal but at the same time you need to dwell on it for too long , concentrate on the rest of your exams. Also don't sit for too long waiting, a quick "superintendent" call out might make him move faster. I know you don't want to disturb the others though.

evolving_doors

Erica Tangy Respirator wrote: »

Report the superintendent. There's no excuse for looking at his phone. Boredom is irrelevant and absolutely not a valid excuse.

Yup report 'em. they are supposed to be giving you their full attention... that includes keeping an eye out for cheating too... when the cats away etc.

Also it's a communication device so I don't think that'd be allowed in the rule books.

With some students the time element is down to the very second, so waiting for some numpty to get off snapchat is a bit of an insult to all the work the students have put in over the years.

Go to the principal / teacher in your school who's organising the exams and say you're not happy.
If you don't think anything is being done about it then ring up the SEC

Customer Service:
Email:customerservice.manager@examinations.ie
Phone: 090-6442851, 6442852
Fax: 090-6442896

Better off if you can get your parents/another teacher who's around to do it as you've enough to be worrying with.
You're probably at the stage where you've gaps in the timetable so it mightn't affect you that much but others will have to suffer under this ignorance, say it to some of your mates aswell if you're stressed. They might do something too.

Don't be afraid to use your voice if they're not paying attention. "Sorry could I get some paper please!!". You've spent nearly 14 years listening to teachers calling out others, it's payback time

Notorious

Erica Tangy Respirator wrote: »

Report the superintendent. There's no excuse for looking at his phone. Boredom is irrelevant and absolutely not a valid excuse.

Not picking on you Erica Tangy Respirator (yours is the shortest post to comment), but I'm surprised at the amount of posters here (I assume most of us are teachers) crying out to report the supervisor. I could give you ten supervisors who I know have used their phones during exams. I get that the SEC rule with an iron fist and do not tolerate it, but I think it's a little extreme. As long as the students have your attention I see no harm in sending a few texts to pass the time.

On a slightly different note, I know an exam secretary who has a Whatsapp group for all the supervisors/readers/scribes. Dead handy for reporting a student who hasn't turned up for an exam, or a separate centre which is missing an exam resource.

rainbowtrout

Notorious wrote: »

Not picking on you Arlessienne (yours is the shortest post to comment), but I'm surprised at the amount of posters here (I assume most of us are teachers) crying out to report the supervisor. I could give you ten supervisors who I know have used their phones during exams. I get that the SEC rule with an iron fist and do not tolerate it, but I think it's a little extreme. As long as the students have your attention I see no harm in sending a few texts to pass the time.

Because if you are texting you are not watching the students, and this could lead to cheating. It only takes a few seconds. More to the point, if a person is being paid to do the job, why can't they just be professional and do the job?

Notorious

rainbowtrout wrote: »

...if a person is being paid to do the job, why can't they just be professional and do the job?

You are doing the job. I'm not suggesting that I support ignoring students and the task at hand. We are all professional; it wouldn't be professional to get lost in your phone or fall asleep on the job. You can send a text while keeping an eye on everything going on in the room.

rainbowtrout

Notorious wrote: »

You are doing the job. I'm not suggesting that I support ignoring students and the task at hand. We are all professional; it wouldn't be professional to get lost in your phone or fall asleep on the job. You can send a text while keeping an eye on everything going on in the room.

People look at their phones when they send texts, not at everything else going on around them. Pubs and cafes are full of people texting and not looking at anything going on in their surroundings. People have car accidents because their eyes are on their phones and not on the road. Why would exam supervisors suddenly have the ability to keep an eye on everything going on in the room when their eyes are on the screen?

Notorious

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Why would exam supervisors suddenly have the ability to keep an eye on everything going on in the room when their eyes are on the screen?

Type a word or two, look around. Rinse and repeat. Students cheating in an exam are pretty obvious.

red_fox

Mistakes can happen and attention will wane over the course of the exam but it's not hard to keep on top of everything as it is.

The rule serves in part as a precaution that distraction can occur and what any of us can do safely matters less than what we should be doing. I'm generally happy to argue against rules I disagree with but I see a reason for this, it cannot be permitted as a free for all, and I struggle to imagine how one could set a rule of maximum use other than a ban (no more than three seconds of screen viewing in any 10 seconds and a total not exceeding five minutes in any hour).

Crazyteacher

I honestly don't know how superintendents have time to be looking at their phones. It's non stop from the minute I get in to the centre. Even when I am sitting I'm scanning the room.

evolving_doors

Notorious wrote: »

You are doing the job. I'm not suggesting that I support ignoring students and the task at hand. We are all professional; it wouldn't be professional to get lost in your phone or fall asleep on the job. You can send a text while keeping an eye on everything going on in the exam

Can it not wait till after the exam?

If it's so urgent then get the exams officer to cover you for 5 minutes.

man_no_plan

You either have a rule or you don't.

In most schools students aren't allowed phones in class. Should we say that if its only an odd text its okay once the work is done?

This constant erosion of standards and double standards for teachers really pisses me off.

CWF

The reality is the SEC can't afford to sack and get new superintendents, they simply aren't there. Very few want to do it anymore, it can be a pain of a job, depending where your school is, what the kids are like etc. This year in particular they are scraping the bottom of the barrell. In my centre this year they had to call someone from the ''extended reserve panel''. They were only given 12 hours notice and didn't even receive the training!!!

rainbowtrout

CWF wrote: »

The reality is the SEC can't afford to sack and get new superintendents, they simply aren't there. Very few want to do it anymore, it can be a pain of a job, depending where your school is, what the kids are like etc. This year in particular they are scraping the bottom of the barrell. In my centre this year they had to call someone from the ''extended reserve panel''. They were only given 12 hours notice and didn't even receive the training!!!

It doesn't mean superintendents should take the piss and lower the standards.

CWF

man_no_plan wrote: »

You either have a rule or you don't.

In most schools students aren't allowed phones in class. Should we say that if its only an odd text its okay once the work is done?

This constant erosion of standards and double standards for teachers really pisses me off.

Constant erosion of standards, care to elaborate? Also many people doing superintendent are retired which kind of goes against what you're saying, superintendent does not equal teaching.

CWF

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It doesn't mean superintendents should take the piss and lower the standards.

My point is report all you want but the sad situation is that it's highly unlikely that they'll get sacked

Bananaleaf

Gebgbegb wrote: »

You've spent nearly 14 years listening to teachers calling out others, it's payback time

This (bold) is a very odd way of viewing the situation imo.

Notorious wrote: »

Type a word or two, look around. Rinse and repeat. Students cheating in an exam are pretty obvious.

I see where you are coming from with your point but ....

red_fox wrote: »

I struggle to imagine how one could set a rule of maximum use other than a ban (no more than three seconds of screen viewing in any 10 seconds and a total not exceeding five minutes in any hour).

this is the issue really. It's not allowed yet there are many who do it anyway. Allow 'the odd text' and they'll be catching up on Netflix next.

CWF wrote: »

The reality is the SEC can't afford to sack and get new superintendents, they simply aren't there. Very few want to do it anymore, it can be a pain of a job

I'm sorry (and this isn't aimed at you) but anyone who says superintending is a "pain of a job" must do nothing all year round. It is the easiest money I earn all year.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It doesn't mean superintendents should take the piss and lower the standards.

There is more lowering of standards going on within the schools than there is by the superintendents. We are doing the best job out of anyone. I won't get into it, but see this craic of 'toilet breaks' 'separate centre superintendents' and the attendants outside the doors - there are SO MANY holes in the system, the superintendents (even the ones on their phones) are the reason that there is any integrity left!